Claire Lopez and W Thomas Smith have written an article in response to one written by Iran's English-language news organ Press TV, which is based in London. The latter was published in response to the hit piece put out by the liberal Center for American Progress accusing various people in the US of inciting Islamophobia.
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/39990
Here is the Press TV article. Also take note of the reader comments. You will see a strain of anti-Semitism coming from their readers. I've sent my comment, but have no idea if they will post it.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/196918.html
* Update: They never posted my comment.
The hypocrisy of Iran and their Press TV is astounding considering how the Baha'i and gays in that country are treated. (The Baha'i are routinely attacked, arrested, raped, imprisoned and executed because the mullahs will not recognize their religion. Gays are hanged.) Keep in mind that two of the Press TV "reporters" are none other than George Galloway and Yvonne Ridley, two dopes pictured below.
Yvonne Ridley
And how timely. Here is a report from Newsmax on how Iran is treating Bibles:
http://www.newsmax.com/PrintTemplate.aspx?nodeid=408824
Can you say "hypocrisy"?
So the question raised is whether Press TV is subtly trying to encourage "hits" on the people they have identified. That's the old Khomeini international fatwa method, you know. Ask Salmon Rushdie.
15 comments:
"Here's a recent photo of how they handle human rights in Iran. (You won't see this on Press TV.)"
That's because the picture of the woman about to be stoned is actually a screencap from a movie made in the Netherlands in 1994 called "The Stone," directed by Mahnaz Tamizi. The actress is named Smadar Monsinos.
Really Gary, you have to stop falling so easily for Jewish propaganda and lies and do some more research before you post.
Here is another telling statistic: In 2003, when Bush I took Baghdad from Saddam Hussein, there were an estimated million or so Christians in Iraq. By 2010 their numbers had fallen in half (PBS, "Disappearing Christians of Iraq. 7/23/2010).
In October, 2010 Muslim terrorists entered Our Lady of Salvation church in Baghdad and murdered two priests and over 50 (!) congregants (Rueters, "Iraq church raid ends with 52 dead 11/1/10). That December only one (!) Christian Church in the city formally observed Christmas but Christian families were still singled out for violence and death in their homes.
This happened on our watch! This, when we had troops there.
It is not only the Jews that the Muslims despise, it is EVERYONE besides Muslims (and other Muslim sects and tribes but primarily non-Muslims).
.
Really anonymous? Since I am intellectually honest, I will research that since every time I have seen that photo it has been reported as having actually happened in Iran.
Yet two points remain.
1 Are you suggesting that stonings do not happen in Iran or Afghanistan or Pakistan or other places?
2 Why do you ascribe this to jewish propaganda and lies? Are you not giving yourself away as an anti-Semite? Maybe it's Christian propaganda and lies-or maybe Buddhist propagnada and lies.
It is obvious why you remain anonymous.
Anonymous is apparently correct that the picture comes from a movie made in the Netherlands about stonings in Iran.
http://www.terrorismawareness.org/islamo-fascism/81/the-violent-oppression-of-women-in-islam/
Based on that, I probably would not use this picture again.
Yet, the important point is that stonings in Iran are a reality. Recently, a woman was formally sentenced to death by stoning by a court but an international outcry has led to the sentence being put on hold or reduced.
Thus I stand by my position that the Iranian govt and Press TV are a bunch of hypocrites for complaining about Islamophobia and anything connected to human rights. I also stand firmly by my statements about the persecution of Gays and Bahai's in Iran.
So, Mr anti-Semitic anonymous, here is my challenge to you: Try to convince me that no women are stoned in Iran and that gays and Bahai are not persecuted in Iran, and that you are not an anti-semite for repeatedly bringing Jews into the debate.
I have just shown that I am intellectually honest. Can you?
I wonder if the 20 or so videos on or about stonings in Iran (alone) on this web page are also made up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPqNCr8KKdU
You really have to stop falling so easily for Jewish propaganda and lies, Gary.
There are plenty more videos and pictures of what the Religion of Peace does to gays as any Google search will show in seconds.
.
Miggie makes a good case that it would have been much better for Iraqi Christians if we had left Saddam Hussein alone. I don't say that entirely out of sarcasm -- I don't admire Hussein al-Takriti, but on this point, for one, it appears he had his uses. He and Osama bin Laden also hated and despised each other.
Now, let's cut the hysterical propaganda about "Islamophobia." There is such a thing, and Miggie exemplifies it. It is propaganda which assumes that there is something unique to Islam, which all Muslims are responsible for, which inherently breeds and endorses terrorism.
It is also true that at this time in world history, the largest identifiable cause of large-scale terrorism is a bundle of actions perpetrated by people who identify themselves as Muslim, and claim to be acting in the name of Islam. To say that is not Islamophobia. To say that this terrorism is unique and inherent to Islam IS Islamophobia.
Gary falls somewhere in between. He really tries hard to say that he knows that most Muslim Americans are good patriotic citizens, but it would be hard to follow what he says about Islam to its logical conclusion without contending that they really must practice a very watered-down version of Islam in order not to be terrorist.
That would mean they are not REAL Muslims at all, which is not likely to endear the speaker to any devout Muslim, however peaceful.
Gary also belittles any mention of Jewish or Christian terrorism, because it was a long time ago. What he misses, either deliberately because it is inconvenient, or unconsciously because he is oblivious, is that atrocities ARE mandated by the holy writ of both faiths, and have been practiced by fanatics of both faiths. There is nothing uniquely Islamic about this. It is just that this decade, the people in the world who actually PRACTICE such bloody nonsense in the name of their faith are indeed Muslims -- a small fraction of Muslims, but noticeably Muslim.
Siarlys,
A rather tortured opinion. You could either go back say the last 20 or so years and countup the terror attacks to see who did them or you could just use your common sense. Again I state that most Muslims are not terrorists, not even close to most, but they cannot ignore what is happening world-wide-not just the terror attacks, but the supremists and hateful preaching of so many of their clerics, who are going by their interpretation of the Koran and the hadith. To talk about these things or stand up to them as a pressing problem is not hateful to Muslims in general. At least that's the way I deal with it.
That sounds good Gary, and is not much different than what I just said. But when you endorse people distributing videos calling the proposed presence of a mosque in an empty building in New York as he second wave of 9/11, you call into question whether you really mean what you just said.
Building a mosque does not equal hijacking planes to fly into skyscrapers. You can't be taken seriously saying most Muslims are peaceful, when you sympathize with mobs demanding that no Muslim be allowed to build a mosque in their home town, whether that is in New York or Tennessee.
I have no doubt that those Muslims who sympathize with the al Qaeda agenda are hiding behind a mask of peace and love. It is the standard subterfuge for anyone in hostile territory. But that has to be called on an individual basis, not by broadsides about Islam.
The decision to put Japanese Americans into concentration camps was made by men who sincerely believed that it was just too much trouble to sort out the loyal citizens from the covert saboteurs.
The relocation of the Japanese-Americans was a tragic injustice. That is why I would not support such a move against Muslim-Americans. The only german-Americans and Italian-Americans who were detained were those known to be supportive of nazi germany and fascit Italy. The german-American Bund for example.
Now we're making some progress. How about the right of American Muslims who bought property on the open market to build a mosque on the property they bought?
As I have said many times before, Siarlys, they have the absolute right to build a mosque on property they own. Do they have the right to tax-payer money to build it? No-nobody has an absolute right to tax payer money.
Should they respect the sensitivities of a majority of Americans who oppose the Ground Zero site? Yes. Keep in mind that building was struck by the landing gear of one of the planes.
"Respect the sensitivities of Americans who..."
That's called a heckler's veto. Your right to exercise your rights ends where my sensitivities begin.
In fact, that's roughly the argument of those who demand that Denmark punish those who published defamatory cartoons of Muhammed. "You hurt our FEELINGS, you shouldn't DO that."
I repeat again, they have the right to build their mosques on land they own. I question their motives because they show no consideration for the sensitivities of the majority. It appears that they want to shove it down our throats. It will only make the situation worse.
But they have the right.
"I question their motives because they show no consideration for the sensitivities of the majority."
By that standard, no mosques could be built anywhere, because in our diverse population, there will always be SOME people who object, and they will always CLAIM to speak for the majority, especially since the majority are, in fact, non-Muslim, although most of us don't really care.
Once a semi-peaceful mob gathers to object, if a local group of Muslims has the nerve to proceed to build themselves a house of worship on private property they built for the purpose, Gary Fouse will intone once again "It appears that they want to shove it down our throats."
What a sweet set up for the demagogues.
It is insensitive to put a mosque at Ground Zero. I did not say it was insensitive to simply build a mosque.
Post a Comment